tv [untitled] August 2, 2011 12:00pm-12:30pm PDT
post- identity politics that we live in in san francisco. in some areas of transportation and engineering there has been that perspective of a private club, but that is changing as the reality changes. there are a tremendous number of people from minority backgrounds. you see them at berkeley. many in terms come from there. -- intern's come from there. supervisor cohen: -- supervisor cohen: let me interject. there are so many historic black universities. trust me, if you are in a position of power and have the ability to influence, we need to make sure that we are doing exactly just that.
when he talked about stellar engineering programs, there are many schools that i would like to see considered. i am here to be your resources. as a colleague, i can help you expand your reach to really begin to turn the tide on what to discuss with identity politics. when you see someone there that looks like you and could possibly reflect your value system, it breeds a certain level of confidence. as an argentinian man, you could probably relate his soul of this work. >> i have had to walk through more closet doors in my life
than anyone. hispanic, gay, jewish, i have to come to my engineering friends as it is a significant issue that i still struggle with and i think it would be more important for a more broad discussion. moving beyond at the fed vanity with others that have more privileges based on identity, once it is reduced to tokenism
low been and i think that is an important discussion to have and i am glad that the commissioner brought it up. none of us about identity politics. we are not in a post-said that the politics world. you hear that a lot and as the verse as we are, there are tremendous inequities in our community. it is also important that we hire locally as well. business in our infrastructure community should be building from business booming and i went to see incursion, group -- food,, going to transportation,
but the problem is there are not enough contractors with that expertise. and i think it is a long-term discussion that i am glad the commissioner rubout. perhaps something that we can have a longer discussion on in terms of outreach being done in any kind of work being done in terms of training young people. >> i really appreciate the frank discussion and i would like to thank the commissioners and saying that she thinks the bread was an eve for understanding.
i think it is something that we will have to schedule allowed for several meetings. we will explore and get guidance from you as we move along. i am not defensive at all about it. it is what is and it is dedicated to making are there other comments? if not, a close without objection. can we open this for public comment? ok. we already did. thank you. >> please read the next item
number. >> item #4. recommend authorizing the executive director to negotiate and execute annual contract renewals with city and county of san francisco departments and exercise contract options for on-call modeling services, in an amount not to exceed $297,536. >> thank you. is there a staffer for on this? how is this another contract item for other contract renewal? with it in her agent agencies smattering. currently we had a contract valued at $60,000. the second contract we are seeking approval for is a
contract with the department of technologies. the people that actually record and caption these meetings, authority staff, a committee, we would like to continue to contract through fiscal year 2012. we would like to exercise the option for modeling on col. this is an on call task order betweenp pd america and workplace schematics, assisting our departments. we are looking to see if there is assistance for the next year with of the value of a $200,000 contract to work on projects like central subway. with that, i forgot to mention this item.
there was no objection to any of the items in terms of fiscal impact. 44% of the contract will be funded by federal sf. with that in seeking the authorization for the director to approve the value not to exceed $297,000. supervisor mar: colleagues, questions? we spend about $30,000 televising the meetings from the committee to the general audience. sf chap is the travel model. can you explain that tool to was and how it is utilized? >> we have the truth -- the
principal transportation planner here with us. i would like to have them described to you. supervisor mar: thank you. >> the morning, commissioners. technology services maintain the travel demand model. it is the tool that allows us to analyze the different transportation investments we are making in the city with the environmental analysis and impact. it is used as a tool that is federally mandated, essentially, to model our resources for funded projects, including the central subway extension as well as security brt's. we use those not only to fine tune the description, but to
finalize environmental reports and submit our funding of proposals to fda to get funding agreements on this. supervisor mar: colleagues, any other questions? seeing no one, let's open this up for public comment. >> let me make a few points very clear. i heard a debate that was kind of meaningful. talking about this, that, and the other that i would like to connect with that this issue. here you have certain people that no legalese and are going to deliver, they should have a
checklist. so that in the deliberations, the agenda items that have just popped, which i think i motivated, drowning so much so that you forgot, people came over here and were very incensed. this is san francisco. we all know that it is a very diverse city. we all know that it is very progressive. what i want to make very clear to you supervisors and the people of all is that the people who are illegal, people in the executive field, of they neutralize this position and it is happening right before our eyes. we have a man that came in he was talking about behavior that he has no clue about.
for example, [unintelligible] a black person some major project in an area where there are predominantly whites? i know this, because i worked for the city of san francisco and was in charge of some major departments. people would come searching for me thinking i was a white person, only to find out who he was. i have worked with superintendents, [unintelligible] , lots of important people that think i am white. people listening at home know that when i say what i say, i cannot make them. what we have here is a convoluted manner in which things are done. people come here and project to you know.
if you look at the transportation authority and you investigate the department, the department that has fiduciary and fiscal methods, you would see the turnover. as one of you said, you just have to look around here. for example, this is an entity. the entity is a white woman. white women are minorities, did you know that? supervisor mar: can you connect this with the agenda item? >> in connecting it with this contract. -- i am connecting it with of this contract. supervisor mar: thank you. public comment is closed. colleagues? without objection. thank you.
next item. >> item #5. recommend exercising the second one-year option of the professional services contract with cordoba/zurinaga joint venture by $1,000,000, to a total amount not to exceed $4,574,000, to provide on-call project management and oversight services and authorizing the executive director to negotiate the contract terms and conditions. supervisor mar: thank you. >> good morning. in the direct it -- deputy director for the transportation authority and i will be presenting the item that begins on page 17 of your package. the transportation authority has the services of a project management oversight consultant, retaining them for a number of years for a variety of major capital projects. particularly with regard to monitoring expenditures of prop k funds. the original contract to
sfgov.orto [unintelligible] was awarded in 2008 and we are requesting approval of the second one year extension in the amount of $1 million, bringing the total contract value to $5,474,000. i will mention that they are a 100% minority-owned firm, including a number of subcontractors that provide specialized expertise for these firms and business enterprises, small business enterprises to our under-represented business enterprises and for our of locally owned business enterprises. three of them are owned by women, the other is owned by asian-pacific.
there are 12 women in the position of authority in principle parameters. supervisor mar: thank you for being so specific and concrete. >> one of the owners of the firm is available to answer questions. supervisor kim: i had a quick question about what the folsom st. would trample -- folsom street ramp realignment is. >> it involves moving the off ramp from interstate 80 to accommodate the new trends bay project. this project is actually funded by the san francisco redevelopment agency. this is a service to them. supervisor kim: which is it? of all i could not figure it
out. >> it is the first exit off the bay bridge. supervisor kim: changing the touchdown to wear? >> moving at one block over on folsom boulevard. supervisor kim: where is the new location going to be? sorry, did not know the answer to that. >> i will ask lisa to give you the specific answer as to the st. location. >> local consultant 230. this is a project to at theta as the lead on -- that the ta has the lead on. currently it comes off the freeway and curves toward full some to terminate at a tea
the ramp -- a supervisor kim: turned that way -- -- supervisor kim: turn that way. got it. thank you for the demonstration. [laughter] >> [inaudible] supervisor cohen: at which closure? >> good morning, commissioners. this is to support the candlestick interchange project with caltrans. it has brought up issues where there is a configuration on the northbound being placed very closely between the paul avenue off ramps, considering closing that off, we have utilize the sub-consultants to investigate that question. including conferring with community members.
the answer was no. it was not an acceptable option to the city. northbound on 101. that is the position and we are continuing to have conversations about alternative ways to ensure the safety of that. >> thank you. it looks like the largest item on the list is the island interchange improvement, which we heard great presentations about in previous meetings. thank you for being so thorough. supervisor mar: is there anyone from the public that like to speak? if there is -- a [inaudible] >> supervisor mar: ok.
it is mr. [unintelligible] >> so, earlier i was talking to a gentleman that i have known for a long time. mr. [unintelligible] [inaudible] [unintelligible] okay. i have known him for a long time. this is what is happening. when you go north on 101, as you get off the ramp that was created so that huge trucks could take the old bayshore, going on curtis street. they are not doing that, they want to do that but most of them are outside and they have no clear idea where the authority
-- i do not know if that is reflected in the dpx, but the problem is that if you get three or four of these huge rigs on third street, with a light rail, that is the suggestion. so, i hear all of these things about the folsom ramp going to the pleasure island. i know that some mention has been made about it and it has not been made clear to the public. yes, we consult the people in the area. you know what i hear? that community development corporations are going to make sure -- i will make sure that this information required by the comptroller's office and of the contract in office, so that some
of these so-called absences -- they come to me and i explain, i do not want their money. really. it just makes me annoyed, you know? so that they can come to my house and i give them everything? so that we discuss relevant issues? this is a mess. this ramp was created and it is very convoluted to get on base share -- bayshore. you make this right, look at these rigs, taking the bay shore around the land on third street. i know some other areas where congestion is caused. i will put that in writing and send it to you, the jack. taking it to a better place.
thank you very much. supervisor mar: any other public comments? and we are again on the second year public option. the second year option for three year extensions. can we move this forward without objection? thank you. please call the next item. >> item #6. state and federal legislative update. >> members, please to be here today. the first time in i do not know how long that we have a state budget that was enacted on time. it was very nice coming across the hill. i would like to draw your attention quickly. we had two bills to take positions on. the first is on page 10 of the matrix. this is a bill that on the surface does not look like it
does much, but is intended to be a rescue vehicle in the budget process. proposition activity funding in the budget, some of that money would be available in the formula for this agency and the central subway project. however, the governor vetoed the funding for anything that was not available for positive train control. working with bart and the assembly members office, we will use this as a vehicle. we have asked you to adopt the support position to give you maximum flexibility when we get moving in negotiations with the governor's office. the second bill is s.b. 582 on page 22 of the matrix. it is a commuter benefit program, a program that was sponsored by mtc. it had a little rough sledding. it provides program guidance to
transportation agencies and gives them some ability to adopt ordinances to enact commuter policies within their region. southern california got their back up and almost derailed the bill. they have been deleted from the bill, so it applies basically to everywhere in the state except for southern california. mtc has asked for a support position, and we've made the same recommendation here. we recommended adding one bill to the matrix to follow. it just came to light in the last two weeks. a proposal by caltrans on page 15. in essence, the state, as you get close to the middle of the third quarter of a fiscal year, the state transportation department has two challenges.
one is are they spending all the federal aid in a timely manner? if not, they risk losing it. the other challenge is they watch the other states, and of other states fall through, historically, california has been there to pick up some of that federal aid and supplement projects with it. what caltrans is recommending in this bill, they're recommending that they be granted the authority to either spend some of the federal aid by loaning it to a prop 1b-funded project or in the converse, if some other states do cough up some of their obligational authority for federal aid that we are able to grab it by moving into a prop 1b project when the allegation comes on at a later date, they be repaid, and the state would either have preserved their funding base or gained additional resources during that particular fiscal year. it is a smart idea. there are some wrinkles in it.
mtc is studying closely. some of the agencies are worried about federal money because it does touch locally controlled federal money, too. we recommended watch, and will be working with the senate appropriations committee to tighten up the applicability. there are two bills. i tried to report on them each time i am here. the first is s.b. 223. this is the vlf catch-up bill. it has been amended to scope itself down to apply only to the city and county of san francisco, so the availability up to the full prior to% is limited only to you, if the bill is signed. going forward, it